john@gatech.edu (John DeArmond) (03/07/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0081m04@vector.UUCP> gmw1@cunixd.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) writes: >X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 9, issue 81, message 4 of 6 > >Here's a question: How on earth is MCI (or their assignee, NTS) able to >charge you via an AT&T charge #? Very easily. The sign billing agreements with the local BOC and then accept pretty much anything that looks like a credit card. Most credit card numbers have digits that are related algorithmicly so this testing is cheap. As far as whether it's an active number or not, most AOS's just don't care. They figure that at the profits they're making, they can affort to throw away 20 or 30% of charges as bad. > >I've occasionally punched my AT&T # into a COCOT and gotten the "Thank you >for using NTS" message, at which point I promptly slammed the receiver down >and used a 10XXX code. > Well, you still MAY have been charged. Better watch your bill. Also be aware that you are not guaranteed (yet, at least) to get AT&T with the 10288 prefix. At least one of the systems I know of routes these calls to the AOS operator and flags them as to the nature of the call. The operator then imitates the AT&T operator. Best thing to do is raise holy hell with whoever sponsored the phone you got clipped on. Public pressure is about the only thing on the horizion with any hope of defeating these scams. I've started carrying my portable cellular phone with me on trips. It may cost a bit more but at least I know where my dollars are going. John John De Armond, WD4OQC | Manual? ... What manual ?!? Sales Technologies, Inc. Atlanta, GA | This is Unix, My son, You ...!gatech!stiatl!john | just GOTTA Know!!!